Key result
Continuous ECG monitoring demonstrated significant interday variance in PVC counts in 76% of ARVD/C patients, yet 24-hour monitoring correctly classified 89.6% of periods by Task Force Criteria.
Why the study?
Does continuous ECG monitoring reveal significant interday variability in PVC counts among patients with ARVD/C, and does this affect diagnostic classification?
Observational (n=40)
No
Does continuous ECG monitoring reveal significant interday variability in PVC counts among patients with ARVD/C, and does this affect diagnostic classification?
Although ARVD/C patients exhibit significant day-to-day variability in PVC burden, standard 24-hour ECG monitoring is sufficient to correctly classify the vast majority of patients according to the 2010 Task Force Criteria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
24-hour monitoring suffices for ARVD/C classification in most patients; leaves open whether extended recording refines risk stratification in high-variance cases.
Camm et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C) (n=40). Continuous ECG monitoring was evaluated on Interday variance in mean hourly PVC counts. Continuous ECG monitoring demonstrated significant interday variance in PVC counts in 76% of ARVD/C patients, yet 24-hour monitoring correctly classified 89.6% of periods by Task Force Criteria.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: